Confessions of a Raving, Unconfined Nut: Misadventures in the Counterculture.

“We had been briefed for a few weeks prior to the actual raiding of Spahn Ranch. We had a sheaf of memos on Manson, that they had automatic weapons at the ranch, that citizens had complained about hearing machine-guns fired at night, that firemen from the local fire station had been accosted by armed members of Manson’s band and told to get out of the area, all sorts of complaints like this.

“We had been advised to put anything relating to Manson on a memo submitted to the station, because they were supposedly gathering information for the raid we were going to make. Deputies at the station of course started asking, ‘Why aren’t we going to make the raid sooner?’ I mean, Manson’s a parole violator, machine-guns have been heard, we know there’s narcotics and we know there’s booze. He’s living at the Spahn Ranch with a bunch of minor girls in complete violation of his parole.

“Deputies at the station quite frankly became very annoyed that no action was being taken about Manson. My contention is this–the reason Manson was left on the street was because our department thought that he was going to attack the Black Panthers. We were getting intelligence briefings that Manson was anti-black and he had supposedly killed a Black Panther, the body of which could not be found, and the department thought that he was going to launch an attack on the Black Panthers.

“Manson was a very ready tool, apparently, because he did have some racial hatred and he wanted to vent it. But they hadn’t anticipated him attacking someone other than the Panthers, which he did. Manson changed his score. Changed the program at the last moment and attacked the Tates and then went over to the LaBiancas and killed them. And here was the Sheriff’s Department suddenly wondering, ‘Jesus Christ, what are we gonna do about this? We can’t cover this up. Well, maybe we can.’

“I bet those memos are no longer in existence. The memos about what Manson was doing. Citizens’ complaints. All those things I’m sure have disappeared by now. It shows the police were conscious of the fact that he had these weapons in violation of his parole. You’ve got at least involvement here on the part of Manson’s parole officer, on the part of the Sheriff’s Department, probably the sheriff himself, and whoever gave him his orders. Manson should have been [imprisoned] long before the killings, because he was on parole, period. He was living at the Spahn Ranch with an outlaw motorcycle gang. I feel that, to say the least, the sheriff of Los Angeles County is an accessory to murder.

“The raid was a week after the Sharon Tate thing, and the intelligence information was coming in for about three weeks prior to the raid. They just didn’t want any arrests made. It was obvious they wanted the intelligence information we were gathering for some other reason. Three days after they were arrested, 72 hours later, they were all released–lack of evidence–after this mammoth raid. This raid involved two helicopters, 102 deputies and about 25 radio cars, and all the charges were dropped against everyone.

“It appeared to me that the raid was more or less staged as an afterthought. It was like a scenario that we were going through. There was some kind of a grand plan that we were participating in, but I never had the feeling the raid was necessary or that it required so many personnel. Now, if you were a police official and you were planning a raid on the Spahn Ranch, utilizing 102 deputies and helicopters and all that, one would think that with all the information coming out a month prior to the raid, wouldn’t you have them under fairly close surveillance? If you did have them under fairly close surveillance, wouldn’t you see them leave the Spahn Ranch to go over and kill seven people and then come back?

“So the hypothesis I put forward is, either we didn’t have them under surveillance for grand-theft-auto because it was a big farce, or else they were under surveillance by somebody much higher than the Sheriff’s Department, and they did go through this scenario of killing at the Tate house and then come back, and then we went through the motions to do our raid. Either they were under surveillance at the time, which means somebody must have seen them go to the Tate house and commit the killings, or else they weren’t under surveillance.

“You have to remember that Charlie was on federal parole all this time from ’67 to ’69. Do you realize all the shit he was getting away with while he was on parole? Now here’s the kicker. Before the Tate killings, he had been arrested at Malibu twice for statutory rape. Never got [imprisoned for parole violation]. During the Tate killings and the Spahn Ranch raid, Manson’s parole officer was on vacation, so he had no knowledge of Manson being incarcerated, so naturally Manson was released, but why wasn’t a parole hold put on him?

“It’s like Manson had God on his side when all these things are going down, or else somebody was watching every move he made, somebody was controlling from behind the scenes. Somebody saw that no parole hold was placed. Manson liked to ball young girls, so he just did his thing and he was released and they didn’t put any hold on him. But somebody very high up was controlling everything that was going on and was seeing to it that we didn’t bust Manson.

“Prior to the Spahn Ranch raid, there was a memo–it was verbal, I would have loved to Xerox some things but there wasn’t anything to Xerox–that we weren’t to arrest Manson or any of his followers prior to the raid. It was intimated to us that we were going to make a raid on the Spahn ranch, but the captain came out briefly and said, ‘No action is to be taken on anybody at the Spahn ranch. I want memos submitted directly to me with a cover sheet so nobody else can read them.’

“So deputies were submitting memos on information about the Spahn Ranch that other deputies weren’t even allowed to see. We were to submit intelligence information but not to make any arrests. Manson was in a free fire zone, so to speak. He was living a divine existence. We couldn’t touch him….”

“I used to spend a lot of time in this room...back when it was a shit hole
and I was a shit head.”

big·otˈbiɡət/ noun: a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.

big·ot·ryˈbiɡətrē/ noun: intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.

I'm typically not naive, but have just come to the realization that there's this whole out-there yet not-often-discussed segment of the online world dedicated to following and/or loving on these irascible criminals.

I'm typically not naive, but have just come to the realization that there's this whole out-there yet not-often-discussed segment of the online world dedicated to following and/or loving on these irascible criminals.

Lots of people love to eat this stuff up. Sensationalist true crime books sell very well. Personally, I get about two paragraphs into an article about someone like Manson and I'm done. I'd rather read about someone doing something worthwhile and inspiring.

my favorite radio show, the jason ellis show, has two awesome comedy segments that they do every few weeks. they take really odd stories from the news and read newspaper articles about the stories and provide their opinions on the stories and people in the stories.

one segment is called "you sir, are a moron." and the other is "women.......am i right???"

i am not sure which one this story would fall under.

"There is nothing to writing. All you do is sit down at a typewriter and bleed."- Hemingway

I'm typically not naive, but have just come to the realization that there's this whole out-there yet not-often-discussed segment of the online world dedicated to following and/or loving on these irascible criminals.

Lots of people love to eat this stuff up. Sensationalist true crime books sell very well. Personally, I get about two paragraphs into an article about someone like Manson and I'm done. I'd rather read about someone doing something worthwhile and inspiring.

I find some of it fascinating, but only to the point of reading (and even that, not so much).

The Stranger Beside Me, by Ann Rule, detailed Ted Bundy's crimes but also her relationship with him. The curious side of me was taken by his ability to appear upstanding and "normal" despite also being a truly heinous, violent man.

gimme, I'm not sure either category would fit - the "women" one seems to allude to all women being the same. The former one I could see on an individual guy basis but as to Manson, I think he went around the bend awhile ago, so in good conscience I can't apply the moron term to him.

In the DP thread... I detailed the case of David Shearing who killed a family of six that was camping at Wells Gray Park (near my city). He kept captive the two really young daughters for a few days while he did what he did with them before finishing them off.

This foul individual should have been executed for his obscenity, but this has already been debated in the DP thread- some feel that this sick, pathetic loser deserves life. Both sides to this debate lose because it's not entirely inconceivable that Canada's tissue paper soft penal system will open the doors and...

... allow Shearing to start a new life with...

Idiot Exhibit #2: his wife (the name has been withheld from the public).

It's true. Some idiot married this grotesque human being.

* It wasn't for his looks (he's no Robert Redford to put it nicely) and it wasn't for his intelligence (he's no Einstein either). I'm thinking it's just sheer idiocy of the highest order that led some troll to think she wanted to marry this guy.

In the DP thread... I detailed the case of David Shearing who killed a family of six that was camping at Wells Gray Park (near my city). He kept captive the two really young daughters for a few days while he did what he did with them before finishing them off.

This foul individual should have been executed for his obscenity, but this has already been debated in the DP thread- some feel that this sick, pathetic loser deserves life. Both sides to this debate lose because it's not entirely inconceivable that Canada's tissue paper soft penal system will open the doors and...

... allow Shearing to start a new life with...

Idiot Exhibit #2: his wife (the name has been withheld from the public).

It's true. Some idiot married this grotesque human being.

* It wasn't for his looks (he's no Robert Redford to put it nicely) and it wasn't for his intelligence (he's no Einstein either). I'm thinking it's just sheer idiocy of the highest order that led some troll to think she wanted to marry this guy.

Yes, Canada's incompetent police officers investigated, caught, and prosecuted this guy, our soft-on-crime judiciary convicted and sentenced him, and our tissue paper penal system has kept him in jail for more then 30 years. Surely an example of a miscarriage of justice.

In the DP thread... I detailed the case of David Shearing who killed a family of six that was camping at Wells Gray Park (near my city). He kept captive the two really young daughters for a few days while he did what he did with them before finishing them off.

This foul individual should have been executed for his obscenity, but this has already been debated in the DP thread- some feel that this sick, pathetic loser deserves life. Both sides to this debate lose because it's not entirely inconceivable that Canada's tissue paper soft penal system will open the doors and...

... allow Shearing to start a new life with...

Idiot Exhibit #2: his wife (the name has been withheld from the public).

It's true. Some idiot married this grotesque human being.

* It wasn't for his looks (he's no Robert Redford to put it nicely) and it wasn't for his intelligence (he's no Einstein either). I'm thinking it's just sheer idiocy of the highest order that led some troll to think she wanted to marry this guy.

Yes, Canada's incompetent police officers investigated, caught, and prosecuted this guy, our soft-on-crime judiciary convicted and sentenced him, and our tissue paper penal system has kept him in jail for more then 30 years. Surely an example of a miscarriage of justice.

He's up for parole every two years with he and his advocates encouraging it. He's found religion and a wife- don't be surprised when he's released.

The remaining family members are forced to show up with their petitions and voice their displeasure- forced to relive the event.

Justice would have been a rope. Not conjugal visits, warm meals, internet access, clean clothes, and hope.

In the DP thread... I detailed the case of David Shearing who killed a family of six that was camping at Wells Gray Park (near my city). He kept captive the two really young daughters for a few days while he did what he did with them before finishing them off.

This foul individual should have been executed for his obscenity, but this has already been debated in the DP thread- some feel that this sick, pathetic loser deserves life. Both sides to this debate lose because it's not entirely inconceivable that Canada's tissue paper soft penal system will open the doors and...

... allow Shearing to start a new life with...

Idiot Exhibit #2: his wife (the name has been withheld from the public).

It's true. Some idiot married this grotesque human being.

* It wasn't for his looks (he's no Robert Redford to put it nicely) and it wasn't for his intelligence (he's no Einstein either). I'm thinking it's just sheer idiocy of the highest order that led some troll to think she wanted to marry this guy.

Yes, Canada's incompetent police officers investigated, caught, and prosecuted this guy, our soft-on-crime judiciary convicted and sentenced him, and our tissue paper penal system has kept him in jail for more then 30 years. Surely an example of a miscarriage of justice.

You never responded to my initial response to this rather cheeky post... so here's another very recent example of Canada's tissue soft stance on crime and punishment:

An idiot shot and critically wounded a cop in our city three nights ago. The suspect Knutson has an extensive criminal past, including a lifetime firearms ban and a second-degree murder charge. The second-degree murder charge was in 2002, in connection to the death of 21-year-old Christopher Lesniak in Coquitlam.

However, the charge was later downgraded to manslaughter after Knutson pleaded guilty to criminal negligence causing death.

In 2009, he was convicted of three firearms charges after being found by Surrey RCMP wearing body armour and carrying a number of restricted firearms and marijuana.

So... the guy murders someone and serves what appears to be a whopping 5-7 years... has various other criminal convictions to his record... gets arrested for carrying restricted firearms, body armour and pot after his massive sentence... and... what happened here? Did they make him say sorry? Five years after this incident... he shoots a cop.

If people want to be criminals, but don't really wish to be disciplined for being criminals... they should come to Canada. We think criminals rock! Well... let me rephrase: our policy makers think criminals rock.

Last week, in a fantastic cover story for the Denver-based alt-weekly Westword, reporter Alan Prendergast chronicled some police work in a small southern Colorado town that was so magnificently incompetent, so recklessly negligent, it makes the Keystone Cops look like Seal Team Six. But, as Prendergast reports, the case against many of these alleged bad apples soon began to fall apart. In fact, he writes, “two of the accused had the perfect alibi: They were in jail at the time they were supposedly selling drugs on the streets of Trinidad to the police’s informant.”

“I used to spend a lot of time in this room...back when it was a shit hole
and I was a shit head.”

big·otˈbiɡət/ noun: a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.

big·ot·ryˈbiɡətrē/ noun: intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.

In 1988 he beat two Asian elderly men with a stick while yelling racial slurs at them. One lost eyesight in an eye and he did 45 days in the pokey. That's idiot point #1.

Today he asks for a formal pardon of an incident that maybe 1% of the population was aware of. Now anyone who surfs the internet now knows of what he has done. Why would he bring this back into the public spotlight? That's idiot point #2.